This is an individual assignment.
Please answer ONE of the essay questions below.
The word limit for the essay is 3,000 words excluding references. This module only uses online submission via ELE.
Important: make sure you underpin your answers with academic theories and organisational examples, when appropriate.
- Consider the following statement: “Globalisation and the resulting increase in competition harm people, as international companies play one government against another to get the best deal possible. Meanwhile, governments continually ask for greater concessions from their citizens, demanding that they work longer and harder for less pay”. Do you agree? Outline and discuss the above assertion and explore other potential effects of globalisation for labour.
- Examine the implications of national differences in culture, institutions and traditions for International Human Resource Management. Illustrate your answer with organisational HRM examples and underpin it with cultural and institutional theoretical frameworks.
- Outline and discuss: “why many expatriate tours of duty fail?” What measures would you recommend in order to try and ensure greater success and why? Please refer to academic theory and cite examples of best practice.
- Brett et al. (2006) identified some of the challenges that Multicultural teams have to face. Discuss these challenges, explore others that might have not been mentioned in their paper and give examples. Finally, suggest strategies (i.e. task and process strategies) that can be used to prevent/overcome these challenges.
BEMM059 INTERNATIONAL HRM: Assessment criteria
Participant NUMBER: GRADE:
|Criteria||86+ % – Distinction||70-85 %- Distinction||60-69%- Merit||50-59% – Pass||40-49% – Borderline Fail||0-39% – Fail|
|Content/Knowledge and Understanding of Subject: Insight into the subject which incorporates appropriate theoretical ideas and concepts, definitions, context implications and critical awareness. (25% of overall mark)||Your work is of an excellent standard and may have the potential for future publication in an academic or professional context. Exceptional knowledge and understanding of the terrain of IHRM.||Excellent coverage of relevant issues, drawn from a range of credible sources (theory and empirical evidence). This includes in-depth understanding of how globalisation has affected HRM, through a number of examples (according to the questions chosen), such as change to national systems; or need of using comparative frameworks of analysis; or need of managing the expatriation cycle effectively or need of managing a multi-cultural workforce. A range of theories and evidence used to support your arguments and good recommendations advanced, when required. No serious omissions or misunderstandings.||A systematic and broad knowledge of the subject is demonstrated and based on appropriate research. Clearly defined range and depth of relevant material in most areas but missing depth on some of the key areas (i.e. depending on chosen question: not enough depth in discussing the areas of employment affected by globalization; or superficial knowledge of one of the two frameworks of comparative analysis; or consideration of only a few stages of the global assignment cycle or showing limited in-depth knowledge of the ones chosen; or limited depth in the discussion of issues/strategies for MCTs). Some minor gaps in your knowledge/ understanding may be visible.||There is evidence of grounding in theory and satisfactory understanding/ engagement with pertinent problems and issues. Good and relevant detail but lacking depth in some areas, with sometimes weaker, superficial argumentation (i.e. depending on chosen question: misunderstanding of some of the issues related to globalization and labour; or of the stages of the assignment cycle; or limited insight into comparative frameworks or dynamics of multi-cultural team-working). Some clarity or focus in the objectives and context may be missing or inadequately articulated. Might not include all of the areas of the assessment brief and some theoretical ideas and concepts, definitions, context implications and opportunities for critical awareness may be missing.||Whilst some of the characteristics of a pass may have been demonstrated, the work does not adequately address each of the required learning outcomes for the specified assessment task. Some basic working knowledge but lacking depth and criticality in most areas. Significant limitations (i.e. depending on chosen question: misunderstanding of what happens in each of the respective stages of the cycle; or little insight into CHRM issues; or poor analysis of multi-cultural issues; or little awareness of the complexity surrounding the effect of globalisation on labour issues).||There are unlikely to be any of the characteristics of a pass demonstrated in this work and the report has not adequately addressed each of the required learning outcomes for the specified assessment task. Limited or no understanding of the relevant theories and concepts discussed. Your work is out of focus (not effectively tackling the task at hand) and fails to engage with the right theories. Significant irrelevant material included, did not answer the brief.|
|Cognitive skills/ critical analysis: evidence of the ability to evaluate and present contrasting view points and draw conclusions. (25% of overall mark)||Your work acknowledges differing perspectives and interpretations through critical analysis and evaluation of theoretical models and/or practical applications and demonstrates an excellent understanding of the complexity of the context in which your work is situated and impinging external factors. Perceptive, logically connected points made throughout the report within an eloquent, sound argument. Evidence selected judiciously and fully analysed. Compelling and persuasive conclusions. Shows originality.||Your work acknowledges differing perspectives and interpretations through critical analysis of theoretical models and/or practical applications and demonstrates an excellent understanding of the complexity of the context in which your work is situated and impinging external factors.||Largely integrated study with a good level of original and critical analysis. Logical and coherent throughout, using both theory and empirical evidence to sufficient depth, but perhaps a little factual and descriptive in places or offering a less well-developed argument overall. Depending on question chosen: i.e. occasionally, the stages of the assignment cycle or the impact of globalisation might be presented but could be discussed more critically and effectively; or the issues of multicultural teams might be over-simplified and the impact of culture/institutions underestimated or mis-interpreted. Most conclusions relevant to study.||Mostly cohesive study with some original and critical analysis. Argues the case; i.e. identifies some issues and might present some valid arguments but it is often descriptive, not always consistent with the research and may show areas of weakness. Sometimes uses relevant examples, whilst some examples might be provided out of context of argument. Your work has drawn adequate conclusions but these may not always reflect the complexity of the subject matter and/or might be rather factual.||The work may be an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal interpretation, and very limited evidence of analysis and synthesis or evaluation. Sometimes unable to make judgements about relevance and significance of information. Conclusions not directly drawn from earlier arguments.||The work will be an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal interpretation, and very limited evidence of analysis, synthesis or evaluation There will be a lack of a questioning approach to the investigation and overly simple conclusions drawn which do not reflect the complexity of the subject matter.|
|Application and Utilisation of research-informed literature: Evidence of the integration of academic concepts in developing management and professional practice including relevant examples and cases cited. (25% of overall mark)||You demonstrate a highly sophisticated engagement in an academic debate with evidence of clear and insightful synthesis of theoretical issues (and practice, where appropriate) which inform your argument. Impressive recommendation plan, where required, informed by both literature and organizational best practice.||Very good application of theories and integration of literature in your discussion of the issues encountered. There are clear links between HR issues faced by real companies and globalisation or expatriation or comparative theories or multicultural teams, according to the requirements of the chosen question. Enhanced ability to draw conclusions which logically proceed from earlier discussion and are appropriate and useful. Where needed, recommendations are also very useful; clear; specific and realistic and directly proceed from your analysis of potential issues/malpractice. Excellent use of illustrative examples to underpin your discussion points.||An ability to question and to explore issues/synthesise theoretical perspectives as well as practical application has been demonstrated. Good integration of theory, applying some knowledge of globalisation or expatriation or comparative theories or multicultural teams (as per chosen question) to identify some areas of good practice and areas for improvement. Where needed, good recommendations that build from analysis or research, although some of these might not be feasible or realistic or do not proceed from earlier arguments.||Satisfactory analysis and integration of theory, applying some knowledge of globalisation or expatriation or comparative theories or multicultural teams (as per chosen question) but not fully complete identification of related areas of good practice or areas for improvement. The work explores and analyses issues, but may not be strong on presenting synthesis or evaluation. Where needed, not all of your recommendations build from analysis and/or research and some might not be feasible or realistic or do not proceed from earlier arguments.||There may be little evidence of an ability to apply the principles of the discipline to a wider context. Limited or no application of globalisation or expatriation or comparative theories or multicultural teams’ theories (as per chosen question). Limited identification of areas of good practice or areas for improvement, showing only basic understanding. When needed, poor recommendations are advanced.||There is very little evidence of an ability to apply the principles of the discipline to a wider context. Very little to no identification of areas of good practice or areas for improvement, or significant mistakes showing lack of understanding. Where needed, insufficient or non-existing recommendations.|
|Skills for life/Written Communication & structure: Uses a suitable academic style, incorporates relevant professional and academic journals. Systematic and clear presentation using appropriate language and grammar. Consistent use of the Harvard Referencing System. (25% of overall mark).||Excellent and articulate introduction and statement of aims and context. Your ideas are presented in a clear and succinct manner and conclusions are well reasoned. Referencing is consistently accurate throughout the work, with a sophisticated, professional written style including excellent grammar and sentence construction. A pleasure to read. The student might be capable of undertaking a doctoral research programme.||Excellent and articulate introduction and statement of aims and context. Your ideas are presented in a clear and succinct manner and conclusions are well reasoned. There are very few, if any, errors in referencing, grammar or syntax as appropriate. Your work demonstrates an excellent independent learning ability, needed for professional development as there is evidence of the skills and attitudes needed to advance your own knowledge and understanding even further.||Overall arguments are presented in an articulate and concise way. The message is clear, effective and easy-to-read. The majority of sources are appropriately referenced, in line with referencing conventions. However, there are some small referencing, grammar or syntax errors. You also demonstrate good self-direction and good ability to advance your own knowledge and understanding and to develop new skills.||Acceptable presentation. The structure and focus are evident and relevant to the assignment task. The message might be at points less clear, effective and easy-to-read. Acceptable referencing within text & supported by list of references, with minor but repeated errors in referencing, grammar or syntax as appropriate. Some acknowledgement of sources might be absent. You also demonstrate good self-direction and satisfactory ability to advance your own knowledge and understanding and to develop new skills.||Work may be poorly structured and presented with frequent referencing, syntax or grammatical errors. Some problematic areas of weakness in your ability to be self-directed and some gaps in the skills and attitudes needed to advance your own knowledge.||Unprofessional presentation. Unclear communication/writing. The message is not well structured, effective and easy-to-read. Unacceptable or non-existing referencing. Inadequate support for points made and / or incorrect presentation of references list. Poor ability to work independently and to develop your own knowledge.|